On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:05:02PM -0700, Ying Han wrote: > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 03:00:30PM -0700, Ying Han wrote: > > > This fixes the typo in the memory.stat including the following two > > > stats: > > > > > > $ cat /dev/cgroup/memory/A/memory.stat > > > total_soft_steal 0 > > > total_soft_scan 0 > > > > > > And change it to: > > > > > > $ cat /dev/cgroup/memory/A/memory.stat > > > total_soft_kswapd_steal 0 > > > total_soft_kswapd_scan 0 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ying Han <yinghan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > I am currently proposing and working on a scheme that makes the soft > > limit not only a factor for global memory pressure, but for > > hierarchical reclaim in general, to prefer child memcgs during reclaim > > that are in excess of their soft limit. > > > > Because this means prioritizing memcgs over one another, rather than > > having explicit soft limit reclaim runs, there is no natural counter > > for pages reclaimed due to the soft limit anymore. > > > > Thus, for the patch that introduces this counter: > > > > Nacked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > This patch is fixing a typo of the stats being integrated into mmotm. Does > it make sense to fix the > existing stats first while we are discussing other approaches? I think it would make sense to not introduce user-facing stats while we are discussing approaches that would not be able to maintain them. I am fine with them being in -mmotm (and receiving fixes), but would prefer not having them merged into .40. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>